## Abstract

Understanding how communities respond to environmental change is frustrated by the fact that both species interactions and movement affect biodiversity in unseen ways. To evaluate the contributions of species interactions on community growth, dynamic models that can capture nonlinear responses to the environment and the redistribution of species across a spatial range are required. We develop a time-series framework that models the effects of environment–species interactions as well as species–species interactions on population growth within a community. Novel aspects of our model include allowing for species redistribution across a spatial region, and addressing the issue of zero inflation. We adopt a hierarchical Bayesian approach, enabling probabilistic uncertainty quantification in the model parameters. To evaluate the impacts of interactions and movement on population growth, we apply our model using data from eBird, a global citizen science database. To do so, we also present a novel method of aggregating the spatially biased eBird data collected at point-level. Using an illustrative region in North Carolina, we model communities of six bird species. The results provide evidence of nonlinear responses to interactions with the environment and other species and demonstrate a pattern of strong intraspecific competition coupled with many weak interspecific species interactions. Supplementary materials accompanying this paper appear online.

### Similar content being viewed by others

## References

Allesina S, Tang S (2012) Stability criteria for complex ecosystems. Nature 483(7388):205–208

Berlow EL, Navarrete SA, Briggs CJ, Power ME, Menge BA (1999) Quantifying variation in the strengths of species interactions. Ecology 80(7):2206–2224

Clark JS (2010) Individuals and the variation needed for high species diversity in forest trees. Science 327(5969):1129–1132

Clark JS, Scher CL, Swift M (2020) The emergent interactions that govern biodiversity change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117(29):17074–17083

Clark JS, Andrus R, Aubry-Kientz M, Bergeron Y, Bogdziewicz M, Bragg DC, Brockway D, Cleavitt NL, Cohen S, Courbaud B et al (2021) Continent-wide tree fecundity driven by indirect climate effects. Nature communications 12(1):1–11

Conn PB, Johnson DS, Williams PJ, Melin SR, Hooten MB (2018) A guide to bayesian model checking for ecologists. Ecological Monographs 88(4):526–542

de Ruiter PC, Neutel A-M, Moore JC (1995) Energetics, patterns of interaction strengths, and stability in real ecosystems. Science 269(5228):1257–1260

Dewitz J (2019) National land cover dataset (nlcd) 2016 products (ver. 2.0, July 2020). U.S. Geological Survey data release

Dunn JL (2017) Field guide to the birds of North America. National Geographic Books, Berlin

eBird (2017) eBird: an online database of bird distribution and abundance [web application]. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca

Engler R, Guisan A (2009) Migclim: predicting plant distribution and dispersal in a changing climate. Diversity and Distributions 15(4):590–601

Haydon DT (2000) Maximally stable model ecosystems can be highly connected. Ecology 81(9):2631–2636

Hutto RL, Pletschet SM, Hendricks P (1986) A fixed-radius point count method for nonbreeding and breeding season use. The Auk 103(3):593–602

Ives AR, Dennis B, Cottingham K, Carpenter S (2003) Estimating community stability and ecological interactions from time-series data. Ecological monographs 73(2):301–330

Johnston A, Moran N, Musgrove A, Fink D, Baillie SR (2020) Estimating species distributions from spatially biased citizen science data. Ecol Model 422:108927

Kissling W, Dormann CF, Groeneveld J, Hickler T, Kühn I, McInerny GJ, Montoya JM, Römermann C, Schiffers K, Schurr FM et al (2012) Towards novel approaches to modelling biotic interactions in multispecies assemblages at large spatial extents. Journal of Biogeography 39(12):2163–2178

Ovaskainen O, Tikhonov G, Dunson D, Grøtan V, Engen S, Sæther B-E, Abrego N (2017) How are species interactions structured in species-rich communities? a new method for analysing time-series data. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 284(1855):20170768

Paine RT, Tegner MJ, Johnson EA (1998) Compounded perturbations yield ecological surprises. Ecosystems 1(6):535–545

R Core Team (2013) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria

Schliep EM, Lany NK, Zarnetske PL, Schaeffer RN, Orians CM, Orwig DA, Preisser EL (2018) Joint species distribution modelling for spatio-temporal occurrence and ordinal abundance data. Global Ecology and Biogeography 27(1):142–155

Smolik M, Dullinger S, Essl F, Kleinbauer I, Leitner M, Peterseil J, Stadler L-M, Vogl G (2010) Integrating species distribution models and interacting particle systems to predict the spread of an invasive alien plant. Journal of Biogeography 37(3):411–422

Strimas-Mackey M, Miller E, Hochachka W (2018) auk: eBird data extraction and processing with AWK. R package version 0.3.0. https://cornelllabofornithology.github.io/auk/

Takeuchi Y (1996) Global dynamical properties of Lotka-Volterra systems. World Scientific

Tang B, Clark JS, Gelfand AE (2021) Modeling spatially biased citizen science effort through the ebird database. Environ Ecol Stat 28:1–22

Urban MC, Bocedi G, Hendry AP, Mihoub J-B, Pe’er G, Singer A, Bridle J, Crozier L, De Meester L, Godsoe W et al (2016) Improving the forecast for biodiversity under climate change. Science 353(6304):aad8466

Vermote E, Justice C, Claverie M, Franch B (2016) Preliminary analysis of the performance of the landsat 8/oli land surface reflectance product. Remote Sensing of Environment 185:46–56

Werner EE, Gilliam JF, Hall DJ, Mittelbach GG (1983) An experimental test of the effects of predation risk on habitat use in fish. Ecology 64(6):1540–1548

Wikle CK (2003) Hierarchical bayesian models for predicting the spread of ecological processes. Ecology 84(6):1382–1394

Wootton JT, Emmerson M (2005) Measurement of interaction strength in nature. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 36:419–444

## Acknowledgements

This manuscript has been developed based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program (1644868) to Becky Tang, and the National Science Foundation (DEB-1754443) and the Programme d’Investissement d’Avenir under project FORBIC (18-MPGA-0004) (*Make Our Planet Great Again*) to James Clark.

## Author information

### Authors and Affiliations

### Corresponding author

## Ethics declarations

### Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

### Data Availability

Raw and derived data analyzed are included as supplementary material.

## Additional information

### Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

## Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

## A Appendix

### A Appendix

### 1.1 A.1 Posterior Update for Growth Coefficients

Sampling the ESI coefficient matrix \({\textbf {P}}\) can be achieved in a similar fashion, so here we provide details about sampling \({\textbf {A}}\). Let \(\Sigma = \textrm{diag}(\sigma _{\gamma , j}^2)\). The full conditional posterior distribution for \(vec({\textbf {A}})\) is *UJ* multivariate Normal with mean \({\textbf {m}}\) and covariance \({\textbf {M}}\), where \({\textbf {M}}= (\sum _{t=1}^{T-1} C_t)^{-1}\), \({\textbf {m}}={\textbf {M}}\sum _{t=1}^{T-1} c_t\), and

Recall that \({\textbf {A}}\) is a sparse matrix, structured such that most elements are fixed at 0. Thus, we only require updating a subset of the elements of \({\textbf {A}}\), or equivalently \(vec({\textbf {A}})\). Define \({\textbf {A}}_{u}\) to be a vector of this subset of elements of \({\textbf {A}}\) to be updated, and vector \({\textbf {A}}_{u'}\) the elements of \({\textbf {A}}\) fixed at 0. Here, *u* holds indices of nonzero elements in \(vec({\textbf {A}})\), and \(u'\) the indices of the zero elements in \(vec({\textbf {A}})\). Rather than sampling all of \(vec({\textbf {A}})\), we reduce dimensionality by conditioning on \({\textbf {A}}_{u'} = {\textbf {0}}\). We reorganize \(vec({\textbf {A}})\), \({\textbf {m}}\), and \({\textbf {M}}\) such that the elements *u* are ordered before \(u'\):

Multivariate normal theory yields the conditional distribution from which we sample:

### 1.2 A.2 Redistribution Matrix

We first define local redistribution from BLOB \(B_i\) to \(B_k\). Using a kernel \(f(;\theta )\) and uniform distribution over \(B_i\), the probability \(r^{*}_{ik}\) of moving from *i* to *k* is:

for \(x \in B_i\), \(y \in B_k\). Then, we take the probability \(r_{ik}\) of local dispersal from \(B_{i}\) to \(B_{k}\) as

We also allow for long distance redistribution from \(B_i\). That is, it is possible for birds located in BLOB *i* at time *t* to redistribute to any other BLOB on the map at time \(t+1\). The probability of long distance redistribution to \(B_k\) from \(B_i\), \(s_{ik}\), is proportional to its area:

Letting *l* denote the proportion of dispersal that could occur due to long-distance, redistribution from \(B_i\) to any receiving \(B_k\) takes the form \({\textbf {H}}_{[k,i]} = (1-l)r_{ik} + ls_{ik}\), which is column-normalized to preserve abundances.

## Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

## About this article

### Cite this article

Tang, B., Clark, J.S., Marra, P.P. *et al.* Modeling Community Dynamics Through Environmental Effects, Species Interactions and Movement.
*JABES* **28**, 178–195 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13253-022-00520-3

Received:

Revised:

Accepted:

Published:

Issue Date:

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13253-022-00520-3